http://www.NewsAndOpinion.com |
It appears as if Howard Dean won't be getting his 15 minutes of fame after
all. Dean, for the millions of you who have never heard of him, is the
governor of Vermont and, until Al Gore's speech in San Francisco on Iraq,
the leftward-most of the Democrats "exploring" a run for president in 2004.

In the 1970s, the Democratic Party was divided between a Jackson wing,
domestic liberals who, like the late, great senator from Washington State,
were nonetheless proud patriots, fierce anticommunists, and ardent
supporters of Israel; and a McGovern wing, which was none of the above. The
rift contributed mightily to the Nixon landslide in 1972, and the Reagan
landslides in 1980 and 1984.

For most of his political career, Gore identified himself with the Jackson
wing. He was one of the few Democrats in Congress to vote to take on Saddam
Hussein in Gulf War I. As recently as February, he was making hawkish noises
about Iraq. But alignment with the atrophied Jackson wing is not a good
place to be in Democratic presidential primaries.

Polls indicate about two thirds of Americans think Saddam is a clear and
present danger, and that if he does not quickly and completely comply with
UN resolutions, military action to remove him is warranted. But most of the
remaining third vociferously oppose war with Iraq, and they comprise a
majority of those who customarily vote in Democratic primaries, and a larger
majority of caucus-goers.

Al Gore's sharp left turn in San Francisco was not made for fear of Dean,
whose Andy Warhol moment was destined to end after the Iowa caucuses. It's
purpose is to crowd out Sen. John Kerry (D-Mass). Handsome, intelligent,
articulate and filthy rich, Kerry is an ideal candidate to carry an antiwar
message, because he won the Medal of Honor as a Navy SEAL in Vietnam. No one
can question his courage or patriotism.

Gore's speech has for the most part been panned. Here is JWR columnist Michael
Kelly: "Gore's speech...was entirely dishonest, cheap, low. It was utterly
hollow. It was bereft of policy, of solutions, of contructive ideas...It was
breathtakingly hypocritical, a naked political assault delivered in smarmy
tones of moral condescension from a man pretending to be superior to mere
politics."

But, perhaps for the reasons Kelly cited, it played well with Democratic
activists. For them, Bush is the Devil incarnate, and opposition to war with
Iraq by far the most important issue. This creates a problem for Democrats.
The Democratic Party today is divided less by ideology than between those
with safe seats and those who must run in competitive districts. Democrats
who must face the voters this fall in races they could lose want to put Iraq
behind them so they can refocus attention on domestic issues which work
better for them. They want a quick vote on (and for) a resolution
authorizing the president to use force, preferably after watering it down.

But the activists won't let this happen. And in Gore they now have a
spokesman who can keep Democratic opposition to action against Saddam on the
front pages, warming the cockles of Karl Rove's heart. Expect Gore to make
more antiwar speeches in the coming weeks, and to escalate his rhetoric (if
that's possible).

Democratic pros were unenthusiastic about another Gore presidential run
before his San Francisco speech, and are more so now. He's going to cost
Democrats seats this fall. But he's put Kerry on the spot. Kerry will have
to vote on the Iraq resolution. If he votes for it, he's toast in the
primaries. If he fights against it, he'll increase the angst of Democrats in
the Midwest and South. And Gore will leave no room for Kerry on his left.

Gore's speech also was the proximate cause of Tiny Tom Daschle's outburst on
the Senate floor. As Senate Majority Leader, Daschle has to vote for the
resolution to authorize force, or he'll be Senate Minority Leader in
January. But the South Dakotan has presidential ambitions himself, and felt
compelled to reassure the Democratic Left that he hates Bush, too.

Like George McGovern, Al Gore has positioned himself well to win the hearts
and minds of the antiwar Left. But like George McGovern...

09/25/02: Schroeder may find the fruits of victory sour09/25/02: Making Saddam change his spots09/19/02: Bush's resolve already has paid dividends09/17/02: Courageous Iranians09/13/02: If you never served in the military, you have no right to an opinion09/10/02: Why the 'air marshals' will fail09/05/02: Resurrecting the "Happy Darky"08/31/02: Are Bush's inactions against Iraq calculated?08/23/02: Dems can't take the minority vote for granted any longer08/20/02: No proof of Saddam's wrongdoing? Yeah, right08/15/02: Mineta's war on what?08/13/02: When Gore said he wanted to be his 'own man,' what was he thinking!?08/08/02: Picking a tree for Cheney's hanging08/06/02: Fears about the Department of Homeland Security are misplaced08/01/02: The greatest strategic deception since Eisenhower convinced Hitler the Allies were going to land at the Pas de Calais?07/30/02: State Dept.'s anti-American actions07/26/02: Journalists are making sure Americans can't differentiate between the stock market and the economy07/23/02: Iran's is on the verge of a social and political explosion. So why is media ignoring it?07/17/02: FBI isn't supposed to stand for Foolish, Blind and Incompetent07/12/02: The ICC tramples on rights Americans take for granted07/09/02: Was LA International Airport shooting, in fact, good news?07/02/02: What the "intelligence community" can learn from Alexander the Great 06/28/02: Muslim link in Oklahoma City bombing revisited06/25/02: A good environmental scare needs two ingredients - an impending catastrophe, and someone to blame for it06/21/02: Stirring the security pot06/18/02: Why the military is so messed up06/14/02: Vast majority $68.7 billion proposed for weapons will be spent on systems of little use in the war on terror06/12/02: Bush saw them and raised them, and he's holding the aces06/10/02: Some heads need to roll06/04/02: A new draft for the 'war on terror'?05/31/02: So the FBI has finally caught up to our priorities?05/29/02: Taking on common sense05/23/02: Political terrorists05/21/02: There is a great deal to fret about, but I've never been more optimistic05/15/02: If there is a way for America to lose the war, Gen. Tommy Franks can find it05/13/02: Impartial justice against Americans by the UN?05/07/02: Want to win the 'war on terror'? Reinstate the draft05/03/02: An expanded NATO is needed as a counterweight to the UN and the EU04/29/02: Islamic 'smarts'04/26/02: Did Bush play his Aces with Abdullah wisely?04/23/02: Why peace in the Mideast is closer than ever04/19/02: What the Arabs of Gaza and the West Bank gained from the "peace accords"04/17/02: Logical Muslim allies04/10/02: How to guarantee an infinite Mideast war04/08/02: Saddam's American friends04/05/02: Arab winners and sinners04/01/02: Why is the commander of U.S. Central Command not coming clean to the American people?03/31/02: Dubya under attack … by conservatives03/26/02: Saddam watch coming to an end?03/21/02: Get the Jews!03/19/02: It's time pols and gov bureaucrats be held to the same
standard of accountability we insist for corporate execs03/15/02: Khaki Throat03/12/02: Making foreign cheaters pay03/08/02: Timidity and indecision by senior American commanders03/04/02: Why 9-11? Ex-CIA officials come clean02/25/02: Don't rule out a quick victory --- even if prez says otherwise02/21/02: Saving our military from itself02/19/02: Front Page fiction02/15/02: Our European allies are like the fat kid who wants to play quarterback02/13/02: Is the Army in danger of becoming "irrelevant"?02/11/02: So, I "propagate hatred" …02/06/02: Bush whacking the media02/04/02: Why serious folks disregard the European Union --- and why Bush must, too01/30/02: Give economy pneumonia in order to protect it from a cold01/28/02: Media is its own worst enemy01/25/02: Journalists making road to peace a bumpy ride, or: A case study in stupidity01/23/02: Toward a stronger defense at a lower cost01/21/02: How Bush could be Generations X and Y's Kennedy ... and guarantee a GOP victory in the midterm elections